materials - property and casualty insurance (c) committee€¦ · to flood insurance being...

2019 Spring National Meeting

© 2019 National Association of Insurance Commissioners

Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee

Monday, April 8, 2019 Orlando, Florida

© 2019 National Association of Insurance Commissioners 1

Date: 4/4/19

2019 Spring National Meeting Orlando, Florida

PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE (C) COMMITTEE

Monday, April 8, 2019 1:30 – 3:00 p.m.

Ritz-Carlton Orlando—Ballroom Salons 1–3—Lobby Level

ROLL CALL Elizabeth Kelleher Dwyer, Chair Rhode Island Al Redmer Jr. Maryland Scott A. White, Vice Chair Virginia Marlene Caride New Jersey Jim L. Ridling Alabama John G. Franchini New Mexico Ricardo Lara California Glen Mulready Oklahoma Andrew N. Mais Connecticut Larry Deiter South Dakota David Altmaier Florida James A. Dodrill West Virginia Robert H. Muriel Illinois Mark Afable Wisconsin James J. Donelon Louisiana

NAIC Support Staff: Aaron Brandenburg/Kris DeFrain

AGENDA

1. Consider Adoption of its March 28 Minutes—Superintendent Elizabeth Kelleher Dwyer (RI) Attachment One

2. Consider Adoption of its Task Force and Working Group Reports Attachment Two —Superintendent Elizabeth Kelleher Dwyer (RI) a. Casualty Actuarial and Statistical (C) Task Force— Commissioner Steve Kelley (MN) b. Surplus Lines (C) Task Force—Commissioner James J. Donelon (LA) c. Title Insurance (C) Task Force— Commissioner James J. Donelon (LA)) d. Workers’ Compensation (C) Task Force—Superintendent John G. Franchini (NM) e. Advisory Organization Examination Oversight (C) Working Group—Timothy Schott (ME) f. Cannabis Insurance (C) Working Group—Commissioner Ricardo Lara (CA) g. Catastrophe Insurance (C) Working Group—Commissioner Mike Chaney (MS) h. Climate Change and Global Warming (C) Working Group—Commissioner Mike Kreidler (WA) i. Lender-Placed Insurance Model Act (C) Working Group—Commissioner David Altmaier (FL) j. Terrorism Insurance Implementation (C) Working Group—Martha Lees (NY) k. Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group

—Angela Nelson (MO) 3. Consider Adoption of Revised 2019 Charges—Superintendent Elizabeth Kelleher Dwyer (RI) Attachment Three

a. Climate Risk and Resilience (C) Working Group b. Pet Insurance (C) Working Group c. Advisory Organization Examination Oversight (C) Working Group

4. Consider Extension for Revisions to the Proposed Real Property Lender-Placed Insurance Model Act

—Commissioner David Altmaier (FL)

5. Discuss Flood Insurance Issues—Superintendent Elizabeth Kelleher Dwyer (RI) a. Hear Presentation from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)

—David Maurstad (FEMA) b. Hear Update on NAIC Communications Toolkit—Laura Kane (NAIC) Attachment Four c. Hear Update on Private Flood Insurance Data—Superintendent Elizabeth Kelleher Dwyer (RI) Attachment Five


6. Discuss Issues Related to Autonomous Vehicles—Superintendent Elizabeth Kelleher Dwyer (RI) a. Hear Presentation from the Global Alliance for Vehicle Data Access (GAVDA) Attachment Six

—Greg Scott (GAVDA) b. Hear Updates on Congressional Activity and Uniform Law Commission Draft Law

—Aaron Brandenburg(NAIC) 7. Discuss Any Other Matters Brought Before the Committee

—Superintendent Elizabeth Kelleher Dwyer (RI)

8. Adjournment

W:\National Meetings\2019\Spring\Agenda\C Cmte.docx


Attachment One Consider Adoption its March 28 Minutes

Attachment Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee

4/8/19


Draft: 4/2/19

Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee Conference Call March 28, 2019

The Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee met via conference call March 28, 2019. The following Committee members participated: Elizabeth Kelleher Dwyer, Chair (RI); Scott A. White, Vice Chair (VA); Jim L. Ridling represented by Jerry Workman (AL); Ricardo Lara represented by Kendra Zoller (CA); Andrew N. Mais represented by George Bradner (CT); David Altmaier (FL); Robert H. Muriel represented by Judy Mottar (IL); James J. Donelon and Warren Byrd (LA); Al Redmer Jr. represented by Robert Baron (MD); Marlene Caride represented by Mark McGill and Carl Sornson (NJ); John G. Franchini represented by Anna Krylova (NM); Glen Mulready represented by Andy Schallhorn (OK); Larry Deiter represented by Dan Nelson (SD); and Mark Afable (WI). 1. Adopted its 2018 Fall National Meeting Minutes Commissioner Altmaier made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Donelon, to adopt the Committee’s Nov. 17, 2018, minutes (see NAIC Proceedings – Fall 2018, Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee). The motion passed..

2. Adopted A Regulator’s Guide to Pet Insurance Superintendent Dwyer said a drafting group began work on a pet insurance white paper after the 2018 Spring National Meeting. The group was tasked with providing an overview of the pet insurance market, industry trends, coverage options, the regulatory environment and regulatory concerns. The drafting group noted that some interested parties offered suggestions for the licensing of pet insurance producers. She said the drafted white paper does not include recommendations on licensing matters, but the background information within the white paper should help guide any conversations moving forward. Superintendent Dwyer noted that comments were received from: Independence American Insurance Company; Crum & Forster on behalf of U.S. Fire and North River; Nationwide; and Companion Protect. She said there is disagreement among commenters related to what sort of producer license should be required to sell pet insurance. She said state insurance regulators will likely take up those issues in the future, but they are not covered within the white paper. Superintendent Dwyer said there were comments suggesting that content from unverified sources be removed, so those references were removed in the version distributed March 26. She said deletions were also made to explanations of actuarial groups in Appendix 3, “Overview of Actuarial Science.” Aaron Brandenburg (NAIC) said the two sentences referencing the now-deleted sections should also be removed. Ms. Zoller noted California has pending legislation that would require disclosures related to pet insurance. She said it is not known whether this will become law until September or October. Commissioner Donelon asked whether this bill only focuses on pet insurance. Ms. Zoller said it does, noting that the bill mirrors other California law in terms of required disclosures. Mr. Bradner suggested a footnoted be added describing California’s pending legislation. Superintendent Dwyer agreed that a footnote should be added to the second paragraph of page 10 in the white paper describing California’s current law. Mr. Bradner made a motion, seconded by Commissioner White, to adopt A Regulator’s Guide to Pet Insurance, with the aforementioned deletions and the added footnote (Attachment ___). The motion passed. 3. Appointed the Pet Insurance (C) Working Group Superintendent Dwyer noted the Committee has a charge to consider whether next steps are warranted related to pet insurance regulatory issues. She said a working group should review the white paper and consider drafting a model law in order to address regulatory issues before they turn into market conduct issues. Commissioner White agreed there may be issues similar to ones that occurred in the travel insurance market.

Attachment Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee

4/8/19


Mr. Bradner said the product can be complex and policies can be confusing, noting that regulators should work to clarify what is covered and what is not under pet insurance policies. Commissioner White made a motion, seconded by Mr. Bradner, to appoint the Pet Insurance (C) Working Group to consider development of a model law. The motion passed. Superintendent Dwyer said this new Working Group would need to have charges adopted by the Committee and could take up a Request for NAIC Model Law Development at a later date. 4. Heard an Update on the Status of the Private Passenger Auto Report Superintendent Dwyer said the Auto Insurance (C/D) Working Group was disbanded during the 2018 Fall National Meeting, noting that the Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee and the Market Regulation and Consumer Affairs (D) Committee agreed to oversee the development of a study evaluating private passenger auto insurance data state insurance regulators have received from statistical agents. Superintendent Dwyer said NAIC staff have created a report that includes numerous exhibits presenting each state’s data. That report will be distributed to state insurance regulators March 29 and will be released to all parties after regulator review. She said a webinar will be held April 11 for state insurance regulators to assist them with how the Tableau tool can be used to further analyze this data.

5. Heard a Preview of the Spring National Meeting Superintendent Dwyer said, in addition to receiving updates from its working groups on the progress they are making and when they expect to complete work product, the Committee will have significant discussions on flood insurance at the Spring National Meeting. She said the Committee will hear from David Maurstad (Federal Emergency Management Agency—FEMA), who serves as the chief executive of the National Flood Insurance Program, and will hear an update on the media campaign related to flood insurance being conducted by the NAIC. In addition, a report on private flood insurance data will be provided. She said there will also be discussions regarding autonomous vehicles, including an update on congressional and other activities. Having no further business, the Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee adjourned. W:\National Meetings\2019\Spring\Cmte\C\C-3.docx


Attachment Two Consider Adoption of its Task Force and

Working Group Reports


2019 Spring National Meeting

Orlando, Florida

CASUALTY ACTUARIAL AND STATISTICAL (C) TASK FORCE Saturday, April 6, 2019

9:30 – 11:30 a.m.

Meeting Summary Report The Casualty Actuarial and Statistical (C) Task Force met April 6, 2019. During this meeting, the Task Force: 1. Adopted its 2018 Fall National Meeting minutes.

2. Adopted its March 22, 2019; March 12, 2019; Feb. 12, 2019; Jan. 29, 2019; Jan. 8, 2019; Dec. 18, 2018, minutes, which

included the following action: a. Adopted its statistical reports. b. Adopted a comment letter to the Executive (EX) Committee’s ad hoc group regarding the Statement of Actuarial

Opinion Instructions and the definition of qualified actuary.

3. Adopted the reports of the Actuarial Opinion (C) Working Group. The Working Group received a referral from the Financial Examiners Handbook (E) Technical Group to review the property and casualty (P/C) reserves and claims handling exam repository and will respond by the May 31 deadline.

4. Adopted the report of the Statistical Data (C) Working Group. The Working Group is reviewing the calculations for the Profitability Report.

5. Discussed changes to its Statement of Actuarial Opinion instruction proposal in light of the March 22 hearing. The Task Force will meet in a week to consider adoption of its changes to combine with the Executive (EX) Committee’s ad hoc group’s changes for 2019 implementation.

6. Discussed its white paper on best practices for regulatory review of predictive analytics. The volunteer drafters will

continue discussion of submitted comments to propose changes to the white paper for future public exposure.

7. Heard reports from the American Academy of Actuaries (Academy) regarding the activities of its Committee on Property and Liability Financial Reporting (COPLFR) and its Casualty Practice Council.

8. Heard reports on actuarial professionalism from the Academy, the Actuarial Board for Counseling and Discipline

(ABCD) and the Actuarial Standards Board (ASB).

9. Heard reports from the Casualty Actuarial Society (CAS) and the Society of Actuaries (SOA) on P/C actuarial research.

W:\National Meetings\2019\Spring\Summaries\Final Summaries\CASTF.docx



SURPLUS LINES (C) TASK FORCE

Saturday, April 6, 2019 2:00 – 3:00 p.m.

Meeting Summary Report

The Surplus Lines (C) Task Force met April 6, 2019. During this meeting, the Task Force: 1. Adopted its 2018 Fall National Meeting minutes.

2. Adopted the report of the Surplus Lines (C) Working Group, which met March 27, 2019; Dec. 18, 2018; and Dec.12,

2018, in regulator-to-regulator session pursuant to paragraph 3 (specific companies, entities or individuals) of the NAIC Policy Statement on Open Meetings.

3. Heard an update on a referral to the Producer Licensing (D) Task Force including proposed revisions to Standard 37 and Standard 38 of the State Licensing Handbook.

4. Heard an update on federal flood insurance, which included details on the finalization of rules by federal banking

agencies regarding the acceptance of flood coverage from private insurers in lieu of a policy issued under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

5. Heard a summary of the current U.S. private flood market. W:\National Meetings\2019\Spring\Summaries\SURL.docx



TITLE INSURANCE (C) TASK FORCE

Sunday, April 7, 2019 2:00 – 3:00 p.m.


The Title Insurance (C) Task Force met April 6, 2019. During this meeting, the Task Force: 1. Adopted its 2018 Fall National Meeting minutes, which included the following action:

a. Received an update regarding the Survey of State Insurance Laws Regarding Title Data and Title Matters. b. Heard a presentation from Rynoh regarding its financial management and fraud prevention system.

2. Reviewed the results of the Survey of State Insurance Laws Regarding Title Data and Title Matters.

3. Heard a presentation from CertifID regarding wire transfer fraudulent events.

4. Discussed disbanding the Title Insurance Financial Reporting (C) Working Group.

W:\National Meetings\2019\Spring\Summaries\TitleTF.dotx



WORKERS’ COMPENSATION (C) TASK FORCE

Monday, April 8, 2019 9:00 – 10:00 a.m.


The Workers’ Compensation (C) Task Force met April 8, 2019. During this meeting, the Task Force: 1. Adopted its 2018 Fall National Meeting minutes. 2. Heard a presentation from the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI) regarding workers’ compensation rate

decreases. During 2017, workers’ compensation rates continued to decrease in most states due to lower frequency and moderate severity. Indemnity losses and medical losses are moving in line with wage inflation.

3. Heard a presentation from Premonition regarding what litigation can reveal about a claim. Premonition collects legal

information and uses the analytics in predicting the outcome of a litigated claim.

W:\National Meetings\2019\Summer\Summaries\WCTF.docx



CATASTROPHE INSURANCE (C) WORKING GROUP

Saturday, April 6, 2019 10:00 – 11:00 a.m.


The Catastrophe Insurance (C) Working Group met April 6, 2019. During this meeting, the Working Group: 1. Adopted its 2018 Fall National Meeting minutes. 2. Heard an update regarding federal legislation and the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). The Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA) recently announced that its new underwriting system, Risk Rating 2.0, would go into effect in 2020. This system overlays the mapping system and provides more precise underwriting of flood risks. The federal banking regulators have finalized their rule, which will take effect July 1, 2019. The final rule will require insurers to certify that their private flood insurance policies meet requirements set forth in the Biggert-Waters statute for banks to be required to accept such policies. It also provides banks the option to accept private flood insurance policies that did not meet the mandatory acceptance requirements set forth in Biggert-Waters for banks to be required to accept such policies. The latest NFIP extension expires May 31, 2019, and the House has proposed a further extension through Sept. 30, 2019.

3. Adopted the reports of the State Disaster Response Plan drafting group and the Private Flood Best Practices drafting

group, which included the following action: a. Updated the Working Group regarding the status of the State Disaster Response Plan. b. Updated the Working Group regarding the status of the Private Flood Best Practices document.

4. Received an update regarding the Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group’s

catastrophe claims document. 5. Heard from the Reinsurance Association of America (RAA), the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies

(NAMIC), and the Wholesale and Specialty Insurance Association (WSIA) regarding steps state insurance regulators can take now to enhance the acceptance of private flood insurance.

W:\National Meetings\2019\Spring\Summaries\CatWG.docx



TERRORISM INSURANCE IMPLEMENTATION (C) WORKING GROUP

Sunday, April 7, 2019 8:00 – 9:00 a.m.


The Terrorism Insurance Implementation (C) Working Group met April 7, 2019. During this meeting, the Working Group: 1. Heard updates on congressional activity related to the federal Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA), which expires on

Dec. 31, 2020, including: a. A report from the NAIC on its support of a long-term reauthorization of TRIA of seven to 10 years as state

insurance regulators have not seen evidence to suggest that the insurance marketplace is capable of voluntarily taking on a substantial portion of the risk of terrorist attacks.

b. Reports from the American Property Casualty Insurance Association (APCIA), the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC) and the Reinsurance Association of America (RAA) on their support of a long-term reauthorization of TRIA and a desire to limit the changes made to deductibles, co-pays and triggers.

2. Heard an overview of the workers’ compensation terrorism risk insurance market, including state-level data on average premiums from 2011 through 2016.

3. Heard an update on the joint state insurance regulator/U.S. Department of the Treasury terrorism risk insurance data call,

with data due to both entities by May 15. The Working Group also heard a report that decisions on the 2019 state supplement, which collects ZIP Code-level data, will be made soon.

W:\National Meetings\2019\Spring\Summaries\Final Summaries\TerrWG.docx

Attachment XX Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee

4/8/19


Draft: 4/4/19

Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group E-Vote

April 4, 2019

The Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group of the Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee conducted an e-vote that concluded April 4, 2019. The following Working Group members participated: Angela Nelson, Chair (MO); Jerry Workman (AL); Ken Allen (CA); Bobbie Baca (CO); George Bradner (CT); Reid McClintock (IL); Heather Droge (KS); Ron Henderson (LA); Joy Hatchette (MD); Kathy Shortt (NC); Chris Aufenthie (ND); and Brian Fordham (OR) 1. Adopted its March 18, Feb. 25 and Feb. 13 Minutes The Working Group conducted an e-vote to consider adoption of its interim minutes. The motion passed, with a majority of Working Group members voting in favor of adopting the March 18 (Attachment XX), Feb. 25 (Attachment XX) and Feb. 13 (Attachment XX) minutes. Having no further business, the Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group adjourned. W:\National Meetings\2019\Spring\Cmte\C\TransparencyWG\0404 Transparency Minutes.docx


4/XX/19


Draft: 4/1/19

Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group Conference Call March 18, 2019

The Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group of the Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee met via conference call March 18, 2019. The following Working Group members participated: Angela Nelson, Chair (MO); Jerry Workman (AL); Bobbie Baca and Tracy Garceau (CO); Reid McClintock (IL); Heather Droge (KS); Joy Hatchette (MD); Chris Aufenthie (ND); Jana Jarrett (OH); and Marianne Baker (TX). Also participating were: Renee Campbell (MI); and Bruce Vario (UT). 1. Discussed the Consumer Claims Document Ms. Nelson said she reviewed and reorganized the material in the consumer claims document. Ms. Cude (University of Georgia) said there is merit in trying to organize the document; however, the Working Group needs to remember not to assume consumers will start reading at page 1 of the document and then continue to read the document from beginning to the end. She said the Working Group should assume the consumer is looking for the question they want answered and then read the answer. Lisa Brown (American Property Casualty Insurance Association—APCIA) suggested changing the word “booklet” to “tool” in the first section of the document, “A major disaster has hit my area and my home or personal property are damaged. What should I do?” section. Ms. Baker suggested changing the words, “is designed” to “can help you”. The sentence will be changed to read, “This tool can help you understand what to do after a natural disaster has occurred…claims process.” Ms. Baker suggested removing the word “always” in the sentence, “Always remember that your state department of insurance is always available to provide assistance and answer any questions you may have — free of charge.” The sentence now reads, “Remember that your state department of insurance is available to provide assistance and answer any questions you may have — free of charge.” This sentence is in the section, “A major disaster has hit my area and my home or personal property are damaged. What should I do?” Ken Klein (California Western School of Law) said the document is missing the topic of debris removal. He said this is a major topic in a community where multiple losses have occurred. He said there is also no discussion regarding what homeowners may need to do to make their property secure to their neighbors. He said, for instance, things such as controlling slopes for people that live downhill or fencing off a pile of toxin that is now sitting on a homeowner’s property. Ms. Nelson said, while debris removal is an important consideration, the Working Group might want to consider using a “breadcrumb” to provide resources if this is an issue. Mr. Klein said, as to debris removal in particular, there are two things that are not insignificant: 1) oftentimes, the debris following a disaster is toxic and needs to be disposed of differently; and 2) if there is a public debris removal program put in place, if a homeowner does the debris removal themselves, it often reduces the resources available to a homeowner to rebuild. Ms. Nelson said Missouri’s experience has shown differences in the ways public debris removal works. She said she is hesitant to put information regarding debris removal in this document, as it is a countrywide document, and there are many variations of debris removal in each state or locality. Mr. Workman said following the tornadoes experienced in 2011, debris removal was a difficult subject. Ms. Cude asked if there is going to be a hardcopy of the document or if it would all be online. Ms. Nelson said when the state insurance departments are doing outreach following a disaster, they want to get information to the consumers in an electronic fashion; however, the departments still do in-person claims counseling events where they would want to hand out physical copies.


4/XX/19


Ms. Cude asked if someone would like to print the document, if they could print various sections rather than the entire document. Ms. Nelson said it is possible to have the document formatted this way once the Working Group has completed its work. Ms. Cude asked if the document is meant to be a resource for the states to build their own documents or if it would just be an NAIC document. Ms. Nelson said the NAIC would make this available for consumers; however, a state can customize it for use if they would like. Ms. Cude said an online document would look different from a hardcopy document. The Working Group discussed “The Basics” section. Within “The Basics” section there is a subsection, “A disaster has hit my area and my home has been damaged. I’ve made sure my family is safe. What should I do next?” Ms. Brown said she has an issue with the second bullet point where it tells homeowners that if everything appears safe, they can inspect their home. She suggested deleting this bullet point. The Working Group agreed, and the bullet point, “If everything appears safe, you can inspect your home,” will be deleted. Ms. Baker suggested changing the second bullet point, “When inspecting your home, clean up things like broken glass and sharp objects,” noting that she is unsure whether the sentence is referring to glass or sharp objects inside or outside the home. Ms. Nelson suggested changing the language to read, “When inspecting your home, check for things like broken glass and sharp objects and remove them before you enter your home” to read, “When inspecting your home, check for things like broken glass and sharp objects and remove them.” The Working Group agreed, and this bullet point will be changed. Ms. Baker said homeowners might not know what structural damage to make note of, because they might not know the indicators of all structural damage. The Working Group agreed to combine the last two bullet points to read, “Take photos or videos of the damaged areas and personal property. You can also make notes about what you see.” Ms. Baker suggested adding wording regarding taking photos and videos to the next subsection, “My Family and I were evacuated from our home. When can we go home?” Ms. Nelson is going to add a cross-reference to this section. Ms. Cude said if the document is going to be an electronic document, things can be addressed in more than one section. She said writing the content for an electronic version and a printed version are two different projects. Mr. Klein suggested adding a bullet point to the section, “My family and I were evacuated from our home. When can we go home section?” that discusses notifying utility companies, the post office and the mortgage company that you are not living in the home. Ms. Nelson reviewed the next section of the document, “Reporting a Claim.” Ms. Baker said in the first subsection, “When should I report property damage to my home or personal property?” she would recommend deleting the first sentence, because it suggests that homeowners might not report a claim to their insurance company. She said almost every insurance policy requires homeowners to submit a claim if there is damage to their property. Ms. Baker said if an insured does not report a claim and, at some point later, wants to file a claim, the insurer might not pay the claim because the insured did not report the claim, which is a condition in the policy. Ms. Nelson said this is difficult, because if someone is on the outskirts of a disaster and their damage is minor and falls below the deductible, the insured may not want to file a claim. She said the Working Group had discussed earlier that it wanted to give insureds the option, because zero claims can increase premiums in some states. Ms. Baker said she has concerns with telling insureds to violate their contract. Ms. Brown said the majority of the states have changed their laws so a claim inquiry cannot be counted against an insured at the time of renewal. Ms. Nelson said she does not know how common this is, as Missouri does not have a law prohibiting a zero claim to be counted. Mr. Workman said he also has concerns regarding the language. He suggested the Working Group put this section on hold and try to come up with alternative language. The Working Group will discuss this on its next call.


4/XX/19


Mr. Klein said the first bullet point in the subsection, “What other information or paperwork could the insurance company or agent ask for during the claims process,” might need some changes. He said providing an inventory list for a total loss is one of the most difficult tasks for an insured to go through. He said he does not want insureds getting the impression that they are supposed to know the full range of their loss, or will be expected to quickly, following the loss. He does not want insureds to think they have done something wrong if they have not saved a receipt for every piece of personal property they have bought in the past decade. Ms. Nelson said the next subsection, “What if I don’t have a completed home inventory list?” addresses this issue. Mr. Klein said the first bullet point of that subsection reads, “The adjuster will give you time to make a list. Ask the adjuster how long you have to submit this.” Adjusters are under enormous pressure to close the inventory claim so they can limit how much the insurer is reserving. Ms. Nelson agreed that there is probably not something countrywide that indicates how long an insured will have to put together an inventory list; however, insureds generally get a couple of weeks to produce an inventory, which is why the sentence ,“Ask the adjuster how much time you have to submit this inventory list,” is added to this bullet point. Mr. Klein suggested starting the bullet point with, “Ask the adjuster how much time you have to submit this inventory list.” He said a policy generally sets forth a period of time the insured has to provide an inventory list, which is usually a year. He said two weeks is not realistic for someone who has lost everything in a disaster. Ms. Brown suggested changing the bullet point to read, “The adjuster will give you some time to make a list. Ask the adjuster how long you have to submit this inventory list.” The Working Group agreed, and this change will be made. Mr. Klein suggested adding a bullet point that reads, “Ask your friends or family for any photographs they may have taken inside your home. These photographs can show you some of the items in your home.” Ms. Nelson made note of this comment and will make this addition. Mr. Klein suggested adding a bullet point in the “What do I need to ask when I file a claim?” subsection that reads, “Where in the policy does it say that?” He said this document is geared toward natural disasters and, many times, claims adjusters are not local and are sometimes not an employee of an insurer. He said these adjusters take positions as to what an insured gets or does not get. Some of these positions are randomly correlated to the insurance policy. He said anytime an adjuster is saying to the insured that they only get a certain amount, it is a good idea for the insured to ask where this is in policy. The policy will either support the adjuster’s position or it will not. Ms. Nelson said it is her experience that this conversation will develop as the claim evolves and not during the insureds first conversation with the adjuster. She said this section is supposed to address the basic things the insured needs to know at the time the loss is reported. The Working Group agreed this may belong in another section. Ms. Brown said there are two bullet points in the “What do I need to ask when I file a claim?” subsection that start with “the company.” She said “the company” is not necessary in these bullet points. She said, for consistency, the first bullet point, “The company for a general idea of what your policy will cover” should be changed to, “for a general idea of what your policy will cover.” Ms. Brown said for the bullet point, “The company about your deductible,” should be changed to say, “For information about your deductible.” The Working Group agreed, and this change will be made. Ms. Baker suggested adding “the company’s website” to the last bullet point of the “When should I report property damage to my home or personal property?” subsection. She suggested adding “the company’s website” to the “What should I do if I don’t have my company or agent’s phone number?” subsection, as well. The Working Group agreed, and the change will be made. The Working Group had no changes to the “Adjusters” section. Ms. Nelson provided an overview of the “Working with the Insurance Adjuster” section. Mr. Klein said this might be the section to ask the question to the adjuster regarding where a denial points to in the policy provision. Ms. Nelson said this might fit better on page 11 in the subsection, “What if I’m not satisfied with the amount of my insurance settlement?” or the “What if the insurance company doesn’t agree with the public adjuster’s or my contractor’s estimate of damage?” section.


4/XX/19


Mr. Klein suggested adding another blue box, in addition to the warnings to insureds, that explains the adjuster’s responsibilities for dealing with insureds. Ms. Nelson said most state insurance departments are charged with investigating insurance fraud, so she does not think this needs to be added. Ms. Brown asked if it would make more sense to move the box under the “Reporting an insurance claim” section because, even before speaking to an adjuster, it is important for insureds to understand the importance of being truthful when reporting a claim. She said this box could go in between the “When do I report property damage to my home or personal property” and the “What do I do if I don’t have the company or agent’s phone number?” subsections, or to the “Settling your insurance claims” section. The Working Group agreed to move this to the “Claims Settlement” section. Ms. Baker said in the “What should I do to prepare to meet with the adjuster?” subsection, the third bullet point discusses cost estimates. She said she wants to be sure insureds know they should not get a cost estimate prior to reporting a claim, because they should not slow down the process of reporting their claim. She said there are strict claims filing deadlines in Texas. Ms. Nelson said this document covers a broad audience. During disasters, the states will be dealing with many insureds that have total losses or near total losses, but there are still insureds on the periphery that will have some impact and some damage. She said, in some cases, if there is not catastrophic damage to the home, the insured probably can call a contractor and get a bid. She said she believes that is why the wording “time permitting” was used. Mr. Klein said, in the case of a fire, there are homes that are total losses and others that are just smoke-damaged. It is hard for the insured of a smoke-damaged house to get a contractor’s attention, because houses with smoke damage do not generate as much money for a contractor. Ms. Nelson said the fourth bullet point reads, “If there is time before the adjuster inspects your home, try to get written bids from licensed contractors.” She said this could be changed to read, “There is time before the adjuster inspects your home. Try to get written bids from licensed contractors, but don’t slow the process by waiting for bids.” The Working Group agreed, and this change will be made. Ms. Brown said it has been pointed out that not all states require contractors to be licensed. This problem could be solved by using a term such as “reputable” instead of “licensed.” The Working Group agreed, and this change will be made. Ms. Nelson referenced a new section titled, “Additional Living Expenses.” Ms. Baker said she would like to see wording at the beginning of the section, such as, “If you think you are going to need additional living expenses talk to your insurance company and learn what the insurance company will pay for before you start incurring bills.” She said there was at least one insurer following Hurricane Harvey who told insureds that they did not tell them they needed additional living expenses (ALE), so it was not filed as part of the claim. When this occurred, the insurer told insureds that they may not pay for ALE. Ms. Nelson said this information was alluded to in another section, and Ms. Baker suggested adding it to this section, as well. Mr. Klein said the ALE section was too descriptive and suggested changing it to read, “ALE typically covers living costs above and beyond your normal expenses while you cannot live in your home because of damage.” Ms. Hatchette said consumers will ask what this means if there is something this general, and that is why it is written the way it is currently in the document. Having no further business, the Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group adjourned. W:\National Meetings\2019\Spring\Cmte\C\TransparencyWG\0318 Transparency Minutes.docx


4/XX/19


Draft: 3/8/19

Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group Conference Call

February 25, 2019 The Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group of the Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee met via conference call Feb. 25, 2019. The following Working Group members participated: Angela Nelson, Chair, and Gina Clark (MO); Ken Allen (CA); Bobbie Baca (CO); George Bradner (CT); Angela King (DC); Reid McClintock (IL); Heather Droge and Tate Flott (KS); Joy Hatchette (MD); Kathy Shortt (NC); Jana Jarrett (OH); Dena Wildman (WV). Also participating were: Kate Kixmiller (IN); Chris Aufenthie (ND); Mark Nussenfeld (NJ); Meldee Love and Tracy Klausmeier (UT); and Barbara Belling (WI). 1. Discussed the Consumer Claims Document Ms. Nelson reviewed the “What is depreciation?” section of the claims document. The Working Group previously discussed placing the depreciation information in a text box and adding an infographic with an example. Providing this information to consumers in a more visual way is easier for the consumer to understand. Ms. Nelson is going to work with Missouri’s communications department to create an infographic. Birny Birnbaum (Center for Economic Justice—CEJ) said depreciation means different things in different contexts. He said depreciation regarding an auto claim is different from depreciation regarding a homeowners claim. He suggested placing the depreciation information in a text box somewhere near the actual cash value (ACV) and replacement cost value (RCV) sections. He believes ACV and RCV need to be introduced prior to discussing depreciation, and examples need to be given for depreciation using both ACV and RCV. Kenneth Klein (California Western School of Law) said rebuilding homes following a disaster may take longer than a year. A significant number of insurance policies are seeking to close the personal property claims and require the inventory to be completed within a year from the date of loss. California extends this timeline in the case of a declared disaster, but this does not occur in all states. Mr. Klein said a problem occurs when the policyholder has a choice between a depreciated loss and the actual cost of replacement. He said a homeowner does not and cannot know within that year which of these to use. He said this document does not allude to this dilemma or indicate how a policyholder should navigate this issue. Ms. Nelson asked Mr. Klein if there needs to be a bullet point or a section in the document that discusses how long it takes to settle a claim, or if this information should be included in the ACV/RCV section of the document that discusses what might happen in the event of a disaster. Mr. Klein said there are two problems: one is an emotional problem and the other is a technical problem. He said if a policyholder has suffered a total loss, and has truly lost everything they own, this becomes an emotional problem. The next day, the policyholder will be buying items of necessity, such as a toothbrush. Mr. Klein said this document anticipates the policyholder will immediately compile a list of everything that has been lost, and this is nearly impossible because the policyholder is having to focus on every item they have lost on a daily basis. Mr. Klein said the technical problem arises when the policyholder does not know what they are going to buy to replace the original item until they know the size of the room and the color of paint on the walls. He said that if these decisions are not being made for 12 or 16 months in the future, due to construction cycles, and the policy has a one-year deadline on closing the policyholder’s inventory, this is a technical problem these policyholders are going to encounter. The policyholder will likely not know they are going to encounter this problem. Ms. Nelson said many commissioners will step in and ask insurers to extend this deadline. She said there are individual circumstances that may present themselves, and a claims adjuster will work with an individual claimant to extend that timeline, as well. She said the problem is the balance because timelines will not always be extended. She asked if this might be as simple as adding wording such as: “We know you are going to be overwhelmed through this process. On most personal property if you have an RCV policy you will get your initial ACV payment. You are going to be working through the construction process and you may not think about how long you have to replace these items. Make sure you talk with your claims adjuster at the beginning, so you know what their expectations are, and then communicate with the adjuster throughout the claims process if you run into any problems.”


4/XX/19


Ms. Hatchette suggested adding a line that says “if you have any questions, talk to your state insurance department.” She said the document should not be too long and onerous for consumers. Mr. Bradner said some of what Mr. Klein is alluding to is starting to fall into the realm of long-term recovery. He said states and towns need to have long-term recovery plans. He said it might be important when communicating with policyholders to know recovery is not always going to happen within 12 months; it could take two or three years. The state insurance department is there to help consumers navigate these types of situations as they occur. Mr. Bradner said the document could say “all disasters are different, and it may take time for recovery.” He said the document could also state, “After a disaster, you will go through stages and all disasters are different. It takes time to recover from a disaster.” Ms. Nelson said something could be adding telling policyholders to ask their adjuster about any time frames they need to be aware of, and this could be placed in the “What if I don’t have a completed inventory list?” section. She said something brief in the ACV/RCV section, or immediately after, could be added to say, “If you have problems in the course of working with your insurance company regarding the timing of recouping that additional RCV, please contact your state insurance department.” Ms. Bach suggested adding holdbacks that may apply as part of this question. Ms. Nelson said adding “please also see the section about RCV and ACV settlements” might be necessary. She said this would point the consumer to more information they need to find. The Working Group agreed. Ms. King said the District of Columbia had an issue occur in which the policyholder did not know their claim was being settled on a functional replacement cost basis. She said the insurer was using this to bring the property back to its functional form and not the actual replacement. Mr. Bradner said many states have approved the use of functional replacement cost. He said many consumers do not understand what this means until they are having to settle a claim in this manner. He said there are many different approaches under the claims-settlement process. He said the section about “like kind and quality” would be a good place for functional replacement cost to be added. He suggested showing how ACV, RCV and functional replacement cost work. Ms. Nelson asked Mr. Bradner where the functional replacement cost section should be added. Mr. Bradner said he would add it under replacement cost. The document could discuss how things are replaced, either with like kind and quality or functional replacement cost. The claim will be settled based on the contract. The question is whether the insurance company adds functional replacement to the homeowners policy or the business policy. If functional replacement cost is added, this will replace the general replacement cost provisions of like kind and quality; and it would replace it with a functional replacement cost, which is not going to be like kind and quality. Functional replacement cost is a lesser value than like kind and quality in many instances. Ms. Bach said this is an incredibly important comment, because it also includes the issue of matching, line of sight, etc. Ms. Nelson said a bullet point would be added regarding functional replacement cost, and she would draft some language. Ms. Bach said it is important to explain to consumers that there may be different terminology in their policies that affect the amount they will collect short-term and throughout the loss process. Ms. Nelson said one constraint regarding this document is that it is a countrywide document that explains the basics of the claims process following a disaster. She suggested using “breadcrumbs” to tell consumers where to go to find more information on a specific topic. Mr. Allen said depreciation of the structure and the personal property should be differentiated. He said functional replacement cost is useful to the insurer, but it may create problems with a mortgage company. More than half of all homes in the U.S. have mortgages. This is an impairment of collateral if the home is rebuilt on a functional replacement cost instead of with like kind and quality. Mr. Allen said there needs to be awareness regarding this issue. Ms. Nelson suggested that instead of starting the section with “What if I am not satisfied with the amount of my settlement?” the section could start off with “How is my settlement calculated?” At this point, the document could discuss the dwelling structure and later delve into how this works with personal property. She said infographics regarding how depreciation works could be included. The Working Group agreed to split up the topics by dwelling and personal property.


4/XX/19


Lisa Brown (American Property Casualty Insurance Association—APCIA) said she likes the idea of adding a “How is my calculated settlement?” bullet point. If policyholders read this document immediately following a disaster, they need answers to questions such as “What do I need to do and what does the insurer expect me to do if my home or property gets destroyed?” rather than getting caught up before necessary first steps have been taken to get a claim moving. Ms. Nelson said this information is something that is already included, noting that the Working Group has been asked if this topic needs to remain where it is. Ms. Brown said the only thing she believes does not make sense is the “What should I do if my home or property gets destroyed?” section. She said this section seems to be misplaced, and she asked if there is another section that this information might be placed. Ms. Brown said the depreciation section is paired with things to do immediately following a disaster. Ms. Nelson is going to move this information. She suggested moving the “What if I’m not satisfied with the amount of my insurance settlement?” section to the end of the document. The Working Group agreed. Ms. Nelson will make this change. Ms. Nelson added the following topics: “What is a deductible?” and “Are there different types of deductibles?” She is also adding the following language: “A deductible is the part or amount of the claim you are responsible for. In other words, insurance companies will deduct this amount from any claims settlement amounts they pay to you or on your behalf.” Ms. Hatchette said when discussing the types of deductibles, the document should discuss percentage deductibles and wind deductibles so consumers know specifically what to look for, because one type of event may trigger a different type of percentage deductible. The percentage is a percentage of the amount to rebuild a home or property; it is not a percentage of the claim. The Working Group agreed. Ms. Nelson said, in the “My adjuster mentioned some of my personal property has a special limit of liability, what is that?” section, the language reads: “A special limit of liability caps how much money you will get paid in a claim for certain types of property. Don’t confuse this with the contents or personal property limits. A special limit of liability will apply to specific categories of property like jewelry, furs, guns, antiques, collector items, and coins. You can find these special limits of liability on your declarations page of your insurance policy.” Ms. Baca said she would eliminate the sentence, “You can find these special limits of liability on your declarations page on your insurance policy.” She said she does not recall ever seeing special limits of liability on the declarations page of her policy. She said they are a part of the policy contract. Ms. Nelson will delete this sentence. Ms. Shortt suggested adding named storm deductibles to the list. Ms. Nelson reviewed the “What if the government authorities condemn my home or property?” section. Mr. Bradner said this could be a huge topic in and of itself, and he asked if this is relevant. He said if consumers have a flood claim and their property is condemned, then they would need follow an entirely different path regarding a flood claim and whether they can rebuild. He suggested striking this section. Ms. Nelson said following the tornado in Joplin, MO, property claims where a home was rebuilt in another location were settled using ACV. She said this was policy-specific language because there is no law in Missouri regarding this topic. Mr. Allen said California has specific state laws regarding rebuilding in another location. He suggested adding a bullet point that states, “Check your state law.” He said in California you could, in theory, hold a policy that requires a policyholder to rebuild without being able to move or use the money. The Working Group agreed to add a bullet point to tell consumers to check with their state insurance department. Ms. Nelson asked if California did this by statute or if it was a result of the wildfires. Mr. Allen said it was part of the package of changes to the statutes. Ms. Nelson reviewed the “I’ve accepted the insurance company’s settlement, I am ready to repair or rebuild. What do I need to know?” section. Mr. Bradner had an overriding comment regarding this type of process. He said encouraging the consumer to document conversations with the insurer, the adjuster, etc.; and documenting the times, days and who they spoke to during the process is extremely important. He suggested putting this at the beginning of the document. Ms. Nelson said, at some point, the document will include a journal section so consumers can record these interactions.


4/XX/19


Ms. Nelson reviewed the “What is ordinance and law coverage?” section. The Working Group members said examples could include electrical, plumbing, windows, safety glazing, smoke detectors, roofing materials, double pane windows, number of trusses, insulation and wiring. Mr. Bradner said Connecticut has passed legislation requiring homeowners to replace their windows with impact-resistant glass if they live within a mile of the shore and the home is more than 50% destroyed. Ms. Nelson reviewed the “What do I need to do before a disaster occurs?” section. Ms. Brown suggested changing the heading to read “What do I need to do before the next disaster occurs?” Ms. Nelson will make this change. Ms. Hatchette suggested adding information regarding the apps consumers can use to produce home inventories. Ms. Nelson will add this information to the document. Ms. Shortt said there is nothing in the document regarding additional living expenses. She said a lot of questions are asked in North Carolina regarding evacuation and how additional living expenses apply. The Working Group agreed this should be added. Ms. Nelson asked if either North Carolina or Maryland has materials regarding additional living expenses to share with the Working Group. Ms. Hatchette will send information regarding additional living expenses. Having no further business, the Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group adjourned. W:\National Meetings\2019\Spring\Cmte\C\TransparencyWG\0225Transparency Minutes.docx


4/XX/19


Draft: 3/8/19

Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group Conference Call

February 13, 2019 The Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group of the Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee met via conference call Feb. 13, 2019. The following Working Group members participated: Angela Nelson, Chair, and Jeana Thomas (MO); Tracy Garceau (CO); Reid McClintock (IL); Tate Flott (KS); Jana Jarrett (OH); and Bill Cole (WY). Also participating were: Cuc Nguyen (OK); Bruce Vario (UT); and Manabu Mizushima (WA). 1. Discussed the Consumer Claims Document Ms. Nelson suggested that the Working Group start with the “What is depreciation and how does that affect my claim?” section. Birny Birnbaum (Center for Economic Justice—CEJ) said replacement cost value and actual cash value need to be included in the depreciation section. He also suggested using a more relevant example of depreciation. Amy Bach (United Policyholders—UP) said UP has a standard definition for “depreciation.” She said depreciation is the loss of value of an item over time due to wear and tear or usage. Ms. Bach agreed that before using an example a question should be answered. She is going to send Ms. Nelson a link to the information used by UP regarding depreciation basics. Ms. Nelson suggested using a colored inset text box defining depreciation. Ms. Bach said it is important to make the point that depreciation is subjective, as there is not a set schedule for insurers to use. She said not all items are subject to depreciation. She said the example UP uses refers to a couch. If you buy a couch, have it in the family room and it is well used, then it would have more depreciation than a couch in a formal living room that is not used much. Ms. Bach said this is how it is done in California; however, not all states may use the condition of an item when determining depreciation. Ms. Garceau said one of the biggest issues in Colorado is how depreciation is applied. She said some insurers in Colorado have schedules they use; and these schedules are available to regulators. She said Colorado often uses the example of a television. She said depreciation is an intangible issue that consumers have a hard time understanding, and she believes a real-life scenario would be appropriate. Ms. Nelson suggested a depreciation example using a roof, which applies to the structure itself. She said policyholders understand their homes appreciate, but they do not always understand the depreciation part. Consumers also do not always understand why depreciation is used at all when a homeowner has replacement cost coverage. Ms. Bach said this might need to be explained. She said the question “how will depreciation affect my benefits” may need to be asked and an example might need to be provided. The insurer will temporarily or permanently hold back a portion of the replacement value. Mr. Birnbaum said there is a hierarchy of concepts that need to be provided to the consumer. First, consumers need to know whether they have replacement cost value (RCV) or actual cash value (ACV) coverage. It is important to explain what ACV means and explain how it is calculated by the insurer. He said this is important because most consumers have auto insurance, and they understand the ACV for an automobile using Kelley Blue Book. This is not how homeowners insurance works; therefore, it is important to explain how ACV works with a homeowners claim. Ms. Nelson said the Working Group might consider using an infographic to explain how ACV works and providing a couple of brief examples. Ms. Bach said there is also permanent holdback versus what is recoverable. She said some depreciation can be collected once an item is replaced. This goes back to explaining that there are two types of coverage. Ms. Nelson said the infographic could show how depreciation differs between an ACV and an RCV policy. This information would be a key part of an infographic. Ms. Bach said the hot topics being fought out in court regarding depreciation are overhead, profit, labor and whether these items are subject to depreciation.


4/XX/19


Mr. Birnbaum said he believes one form of this document should be an electronic version that consumers can access on mobile devices so there can be hyperlinks to a glossary or definitions. He said this way a consumer can see the definition for a term if necessary. He said the items important to consumers include whether they have ACV coverage or RCV coverage and what they should expect under each type of coverage. He said under the ACV section, consumers need to know whether the ACV is determined based on market value or a schedule. Mr. Birnbaum said when the term “depreciation” is introduced, it can have many different meanings, including what the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) says regarding home depreciation. He said when introducing the term “actual cash value,” consumers need to know there are two ways this can be calculated. Depreciation for automobiles uses market value, while property insurance and ACV is determined using a schedule. Consumers need to know how to protect themselves. Mr. Birnbaum suggested using key concepts and then expanding on the topic of depreciation. He said this is a lot of information for consumers to process, noting that it needs to be organized differently. He suggested considering the key points a consumer needs to take away and highlighting the key points in a searchable document. Mr. Powell said he does not know if there is anywhere in the document discussing internal policy limits regarding how items are scheduled. He believes there is value in including this information. Ms. Nelson suggested adding a section that discusses an inventory list and the concept of scheduling. Mr. Powell will provide some language for this section. Ms. Garceau suggested adding a link to MyHOME Scr.APP.book, the NAIC home inventory smartphone app. Ms. Nelson asked the Working Group to provide input regarding the “ACV versus RCV” section. The Working Group agreed that the information provided in this section is useful. Mr. Birnbaum suggested including decision points the policyholder might need to understand the difference between ACV and RCV. Ms. Nelson reviewed the “What is deductible?” and “How do I get a settlement offer?” sections. These sections still need to have text added to them. Mr. McClintock said he believes percentage deductibles need to be explained in this document, because many consumers do not understand how percentage deductibles work. Ms. Garceau said deductibles are also applicable to different parts of a structure, such as a roof. Mr. Powell said many consumers believe a 1% deductible refers to 1% of the loss value and not 1% of the value of the home. Ms. Bach agreed that there are a couple of important points that need to be made. She said there may be a flat dollar or percentage deductible, and the deductible will apply to the amount of coverage. She asked if it is important for the consumer to understand why there is a deductible. Ms. Nelson said that while she believes this is important, she does not know if this is the right time or venue to discuss this topic. This is not a message that will be well received following an event. She said the document could state that it is important to say homeowners policies have some type of deductible which is the amount a policyholder is responsible for following a loss. Then, the document can discuss the coverages this may or may not apply to. Mr. McClintock said earthquake deductibles are high. Ms. Nguyen said wind and hail deductibles are high in Oklahoma. She said the Insurance Services Office (ISO) policy has a deductible example included in the policy language. Ms. Nelson said the Working Group might consider adding an example showing the calculation process. Ms. Bach said Ms. Nelson’s language “the deductible is the amount you are responsible for” is good, and she asked if the Working Group wanted to consider adding “this doesn’t mean you have to lay that money out before you will collect money from your insurance company.” Mr. Powell said consumers are not generally aware that they have to spend the settlement money. He believes this should be included in the language. Ms. Nelson will draft some language. Ms. Nelson reviewed the “How do I get a settlement offer?” section. She said a section that discusses what steps a consumer needs to take if they are not satisfied with a settlement already exists. Colorado suggested moving this information to the “What do I do when an adjuster comes to my home or property?” section. Ms. Nelson said a section regarding supplements could be added. She said this might also fit under the “How long will it take for my insurance claim to be settled?” section. The Working Group agreed.


4/XX/19


Ms. Nelson reviewed the “What if the government authorities condemn my property?” section. She said to be sure the adjuster has inspected the damage. She said the purpose behind this statement is to make sure that before someone actually starts bulldozing a property, the insurance company has seen what is going on. She said maybe this should state specifically before any demolition occurs. Ms. Bach said consumers would want to make sure the insurance company agrees that this is a total loss. Ms. Garceau said it is important for the insurance company to see the damage before any other work begins, even a supplement. She suggested saying “any additional work not on the estimate has to be approved, or the insurance company has to be notified prior to work being done.” She suggested stating “this would also apply to demolition.” Ms. Nelson said this is one of the bullet points in the preamble. Ms. Garceau suggested adding “this is important even if the loss is a total loss and there is demolition.” Ms. Nelson said a bullet point would be added to say, “Be sure the adjuster is aware of any condemnation and has fully inspected the damage before any demolition or debris removal occurs.” Ms. Bach said it is not always within the consumer’s power to ensure that the adjuster does anything. She suggested phrasing the bullet point to articulate the need for the consumer to notify or keep the insurance company informed. It is important to understand that the consumer cannot be sure an adjuster has inspected the property. Ms. Nelson suggested the following language: “Contact the adjuster so they are aware of any condemnation and ask if they have fully inspected the damage before a demolition or debris removal occurs.” The Working Group agreed. Ms. Nelson reviewed the “My home or property cannot be repaired. Can I use the insurance settlement to build or buy another home somewhere else?” section. Mr. McClintock suggested replacing “property” with “location” in the second bullet point of this section. Ms. Bach suggested changing “check your insurance policy and talk with your insurance agent or insurance company and check with your state department of insurance.” She said this is a hot issue in California due to a law that was passed allowing homeowners to replace their damaged property in its current location or to replace their damaged property by buying or rebuilding elsewhere. However, the law is somewhat ambiguous regarding which benefits one can export. She said there is some contention over whether a policyholder can export their code upgrade coverage and extended replacement. She said this is a California issue. Ms. Garceau said, in Colorado, policyholders only get an ACV settlement if they rebuild elsewhere. Ms. Nelson said Missouri does not have any type of law regarding rebuilding. She said it depends on the policy and how it is structured. Ms. Garceau suggested adding the caveat to contact the state insurance department because policies are changing so quickly. Ms. Nelson said it is important to note that the consumer affairs staff cannot do anything but advise the policyholder. She said it could be changed to say “check your insurance policy and check with your adjuster. The adjuster will be able to tell the consumer how to respond.” She suggested adding a drafting note to tell consumers to contact their state insurance department if there are laws in their state. Having no further business, the Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group adjourned. W:\National Meetings\2019\Spring\Cmte\C\TransparencyWG\0213 Transparency Minutes.docx


Attachment Three Consider Adoption of Revised 2019

Charges

Attachment Twelve Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee

11/17/18


Draft: 11/17/18 Adopted by the Executive (EX) Committee and Plenary, TBD Adopted by the Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee, Nov. 17, 2018

2019 PROPOSED CHARGES

PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE (C) COMMITTEE The mission of the Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee is to: 1) monitor and respond to problems associated with the products, delivery and cost in the property/casualty (P/C) insurance market and the surplus lines market as they operate with respect to individual persons and businesses; 2) monitor and respond to problems associated with financial reporting matters for P/C insurers that are of interest to regulatory actuaries and analysts; and 3) monitor and respond to problems associated with the financial aspects of the surplus lines market. Ongoing Support of NAIC Programs, Products or Services 1. The Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee will:

A. Discuss issues arising and make recommendations with respect to advisory organization and insurer filings for personal and commercial lines, as needed. Report yearly.

B. Monitor the activities of the Casualty Actuarial and Statistical (C) Task Force. C. Monitor the activities of the Surplus Lines (C) Task Force. D. Monitor the activities of the Title Insurance (C) Task Force. E. Monitor the activities of the Workers’ Compensation (C) Task Force. F. Provide an impartial forum for considering appeals of adverse decisions involving alien insurers delisted or rejected

for listing to the Quarterly Listing of Alien Insurers. Appeal procedures are described in the International Insurers Department (IID) Plan of Operation.

G. Monitor and review developments in case law and rehabilitation proceedings related to risk-retention groups (RRGs). If warranted, make appropriate changes to the Risk Retention and Purchasing Group Handbook.

H. Monitor the activities of the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) that affect state insurance regulators: 1. Serve as a forum for discussing issues related to the interaction of federal crop insurance programs with state

insurance regulation. 2. Review law changes and court decisions and, if warranted, make appropriate changes to the Federal Crop

Insurance Program Handbook: A Guide for Insurance Regulators. 3. Monitor the regulatory information exchanges between the FCIC and state insurance regulators, as well as the

FCIC and the NAIC, and make recommendations for improvement or revisions, as needed. I. Review findings in the pet insurance white paper and consider whether any additional regulatory activities are

warranted, including the possibility of drafting a model law or guideline. 2. The Advisory Organization Examination Oversight (C) Working Group will:

A. Revise the protocols, as necessary, for the examination of national or multistate advisory organizations (includes rating organizations and statistical agents) to be more comprehensive, efficient and possibly less frequent than the current system of single-state exams. Solicit input and collaboration from other interested and affected committees and task forces.

B. Monitor the data reporting and data-collection processes of advisory organizations (including rating organizations and statistical agents) to determine if they are implementing appropriate measures to ensure data quality. Report the results of this ongoing charge as needed.

C. Actively assist with and coordinate multistate examinations of advisory organizations (including rating organizations and statistical agents).

3. The Cannabis Insurance (C) Working Group will: B. Consider the insurance regulatory issues surrounding the legalized cannabis business, including availability and scope

of coverage, workers’ compensation issues, and consumer information and protection. The Working Group will develop a white paper outlining the issues and containing recommendations for the development of regulatory guidance as appropriate. The Working Group will complete its work by first quarter 2020.

4. The Catastrophe Insurance (C) Working Group will:

A. Monitor and recommend measures to improve the availability and affordability of insurance and reinsurance related to catastrophe perils for personal and commercial lines.


11/17/18


B. Evaluate potential state, regional and national programs to increase capacity for insurance and reinsurance related to catastrophe perils.

C. Monitor and assess proposals that address disaster insurance issues at the federal and state levels. Assess concentration-of-risk issues and whether a regulatory solution is needed.

D. Provide a forum for discussing issues and recommending solutions related to insuring for catastrophe risk, including terrorism, war and natural disasters.

E. Provide a forum for discussing various issues related to catastrophe modeling, and monitor issues that will result in changes to the Catastrophe Computer Modeling Handbook.

F. Investigate and recommend ways the NAIC can assist states in responding to disasters, and discuss issues surrounding loss mitigation. Update the State Disaster Response Plan, as needed, so that it provides a blueprint for action by the states to respond to catastrophic events.

G. Collect and analyze National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) data, and create a best practices document to help facilitate the private flood insurance market.

H. Study, in coordination with other NAIC task forces and working groups, earthquake matters of concern to state insurance regulators. Consider various innovative earthquake insurance coverage options aimed at improving take-up rates.

5. The Climate Risk and Resilience Change and Global Warming (C) Working Group will:

A. Engage with industry and stakeholders in the U.S. and abroad on climate related risk and resiliency issues. B. Investigate and recommend measures to reduce risks of climate change related to catastrophic events. C. Identify insurance and other financial mechanisms to protect infrastructure and reduce exposure to the public. D. Identify sustainability, resilience and mitigation issues and solutions related to the insurance industry. E. Evaluate private-public partnerships to improve insurance market capacity related to catastrophe perils. F. Investigate and receive information regarding the use of modeling by carriers and their reinsurers concerning climate

risk. G. Review the impact of climate change on insurers through presentations by interested parties. H. Review innovative insurer solutions to climate risk, including new insurance products through presentations by

interested parties. A. Review the enterprise risk management (ERM) efforts by carriers and how they may be affected by climate change

and global warming. B. Investigate and receive information regarding the use of modeling by carriers and their reinsurers concerning climate

change and global warming. C. Review the impact of climate change and global warming on insurers through presentations by interested parties. D. Investigate sustainability issues and solutions related to the insurance industry. E. Review innovative insurer solutions to climate change, including new insurance products through presentations by

interested parties.

6. The Lender-Placed Insurance Model Act (C) Working Group will: A. Complete the drafting and adoption of a new model law concerning lender-placed insurance as it relates to mortgages.

7. The Pet Insurance (C) Working Group will:

A. Review “A Regulator’s Guide to Pet Insurance” and consider whether a model law or guideline is needed to establish appropriate regulatory standards for the pet insurance industry.

7.8. The Terrorism Insurance Implementation (C) Working Group will:

A. Coordinate the NAIC’s efforts to address insurance coverage for acts of terrorism. Work with the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Terrorism Risk Insurance Program (TRIP) Office on matters of mutual concern. Discuss long-term solutions to address the risk of loss from acts of terrorism.

B. Review and report on data collection related to insurance coverage for acts of terrorism. 8.9. The Transparency and Readability of Consumer Information (C) Working Group will:

A. Study and evaluate actions that will improve the capacity of consumers to comparison shop on the basis of differences in coverage provided by different insurance carriers offering personal lines products.

B. Systematize and improve presale disclosures of coverage. C. Increase consumer accessibility to different carriers’ policy forms on a presale basis. The Working Group should

consider all possible avenues of accessibility, including state insurance department websites, the NAIC, insurance companies and the possibility of presale provision of complete policy language.

Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 10 pt

Formatted: Space Before: 0 pt, After: 0 pt, Numbered +Level: 1 + Numbering Style: A, B, C, … + Start at: 1 +Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"

Formatted: Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: A, B,C, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.25" +Indent at: 0.5"

Formatted: Space Before: 0 pt, After: 0 pt, Numbered +Level: 1 + Numbering Style: A, B, C, … + Start at: 1 +Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5"

Formatted: Font: Bold

Formatted: Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: A, B,C, … + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.25" +Indent at: 0.5"

Formatted: Font: 10 pt

Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.25", No bullets or numbering


11/17/18


D. Facilitate consumers’ capacity to understand the content of insurance policies and assess differences in insurers’ policy forms. The Working Group should consider: 1) implementing new readability rules as suggested by the Market Regulation and Consumer Affairs (D) Committee; 2) promoting consistent, clear and logical formatting and organization of all policies; and 3) any other measures that would improve the intellectual accessibility of policy forms.

E. Develop a shopping tool for homeowners, renters and business owners on flood insurance coverage, and work with state insurance regulators to develop a standardized website and flood bulletin to assist consumers who have questions regarding flood insurance.

F. Study and discuss whether there is a need for consumer disclosures regarding significant premium increases on property/casualty (P/C) insurance products.

G. Update A Shopping Tool for Homeowners Insurance and A Shopping Tool for Automobile Insurance. NAIC Support Staff: Aaron Brandenburg/Kris DeFrain W:\National Meetings\2018\Fall\Cmte\C\Draft2018_C_ CmteCharges.docx


Attachment Four Hear Update on NAIC Communications

Toolkit

4/4/2019

1

THE RISK IS REALLAURA KANE NAIC DIRECTOR OF COMMUNICATIONS

THE RISK IS REAL APRIL 8, 2019

HOW WE SUPPORT YOUR TEAMS

ANNUAL CALENDAR THAT COORDINATES WITH NATIONAL AWARENESS DAYSCONSUMER INSIGHTSSOCIAL MEDIA PROGRAMSPRESS RELEASESWORD OF THE WEEK

MONTHLY PIO NEWSLETTER – FIRST THURSDAY

WEBSITE

SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS

CONSUMER GUIDES

MONTHLY PIO CALL – THIRD THURSDAY

1

2

4/4/2019

2


KEY MESSAGES

UNDERSTANDINGTHE RISKS

1

ADDRESSINGMISPERCEPTIONS

2

EXAMININGINSURANCE POLICIES

3

PREPAREDNESSAND RESILENCY

4


CAMPAIGN ELEMENTS

INFOGRAPHICSDISASTER PREP

FACTSMYTHS AND REALITY

TWITTERCHATS

VIDEOS

STORYIDEAS

DRAFT PSA/AUDIONEWS RELEASES

CONSUMERINSIGHTS

UPDATEDWEBPAGES

WHAT THE FLOOD?!QUIZ

3

4

4/4/2019

3


FOR THE WEBSITE AND SOCIAL MEDIA


TWITTER CHATSFINANCIAL CHAT, 1 PM (ET) APRIL 24, 2019

Hosted by @readygov to encourage the purchase of insurance as part of a sound financial plan. Questions and additional information to be shared on the April 18 PIO call. Hashtag: #financialchat. Alternate hashtags for consideration: #FloodFinanceChat.

DISASTER PREPARATION, 2 PM (ET) JUNE 18, 2019

Hosted by @NAIC to encourage people to think about flood insurance as part of their disaster preparation kit. Questions for this event will be distributed in advance and discussed on the May 16th PIO call. Hashtags: #YourRiskisReal, #WhatsInYourGoBag, #GoBagPacked.

5

6

4/4/2019

4


STORY IDEAS

MANY HOMEOWNERS BELIEVE THEIR POLICY COVERS FLOOD. THEY’RE WRONG.

PREPARING YOUR PETS FOR FLOOD

30 DAY ANNIVERSARY OF FLOOD

5 THINGS EVERY BUSINESS OWNER SHOULD KNOW ABOUT FLOODS


UPDATED WEBPAGES

7

8

4/4/2019

5


WHAT THE FLOOD?! QUIZ

9

10

4/4/2019

6


CONTACT US

PIO CONTACT

STEPHANIE [email protected]

(816) 783-8867

COMMUNICATIONS DIVISION

[email protected](816) 783-8809

LAURA KANE

[email protected](202) 471-3984

11


Attachment Five Hear Update on Private Flood Insurance

Data

1 © 2019 National Association of Insurance Commissioners

TO: Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee FROM: NAIC Staff DATE: April 3, 2019 SUBJECT: Report on Private Flood Insurance Data The purpose of this report is to inform the Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee about the information filed by insurers regarding private flood insurance within the Property and Casualty Annual Statement for 2018. Private flood insurance data was previously reported under Allied Lines (Line 2.0) within the State Page but began to be reported separately on Line 2.5 with the filing of the 2016 Annual Statement data. The report will also address some shortcomings in the data collection process and make some suggestions for future actions. Overview Floods continue to be the most costly natural disaster in the United States. While the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is the main source of flood insurance coverage, more sophisticated risk assessment and modeling have developed in recent years enabling the private market to more accurately price the risk and generating new interest among private insurers to provide such coverage. State insurance regulators support facilitating increased private sector involvement in the sale of flood insurance as a complement to the NFIP to help provide consumers with more choices and additional coverage features potentially at more affordable prices. As the private flood insurance market grows and more companies offer coverage, state insurance regulation will continue to evolve to meet the size and breadth of the market as well as the needs of consumers. In recognition of this growing market, state insurance regulators, through the NAIC, developed a requirement for insurers to include a line item in their Annual Statement highlighting their private flood insurance activity. This data will provide state insurance regulators with a comprehensive overview of the size of the private flood insurance market and provide insights into the market as it grows.


Data Filed on the Annual Statement The State Page requires the following information on private flood policies to be filed on a state-by-state basis:

• Direct Premiums Written • Direct Premiums Earned • Dividends Paid or Credited to Policyholders on Direct Business • Direct Unearned Premium Reserves • Direct Losses Paid (deducting salvage) • Direct Losses Incurred • Direct Losses Unpaid • Direct Defense and Cost Containment Expense Paid • Direct Defense and Cost Containment Expense Incurred • Direct Defense and Cost Containment Expense Unpaid • Commissions and Brokerage Expenses • Taxes, Licenses and Fees

Data Findings The initial results of the 2018 private flood insurance filings indicate over 120 insurers wrote private flood insurance in 2018, up from around 90 insurers in 2017 and 50 in 2016. The total direct premium written in states and territories was approximately $644 million in 2018, compared to $589 million the prior year. States saw a 71% growth in private flood insurance written premium from 2016 to 2018, with 15 states experiencing over 100% growth. Direct earned premium reported was $606 million in 2018; direct earned premium reported in 2017 was $551 million. Having less earned premium than written premium is indicative of a growing market. For perspective, the NFIP had approximately $3.3 billion in earned premium in 2017. Fourteen companies wrote over $10 million in private flood insurance in 2018, up from 12 in 2017, while 34 companies wrote at least $1 million in 2018, up from 28 in 2017. The top individual company wrote 34% of all business, about the same as 2017. The top ten insurers wrote over 78% of all business in 2018, slightly less than in 2017. The national pure loss ratio (direct loss incurred/direct premium earned) was 32% in 2018, compared to 177% in 2017. State loss ratios ranged from less than 1% to over 300%. The largest loss ratios were in jurisdictions that experienced hurricanes and large floods in 2018: South Carolina, North Carolina, and Texas.


Private Flood Insurance, Premium Written 2016-2018

State Direct Premium

Written 2018 Direct Premium


Written 2016

Percent Change

Premium Written 2017 to

2018

Percent Change


2018 AK $ 726,128 $ 957,063 $ 555,129 -24% 31% AL $ 4,717,310 $ 4,799,724 $ 3,005,135 -2% 57% AR $ 2,918,840 $ 2,826,120 $ 1,607,656 3% 82% AS $ 17 $ - $ - AZ $ 13,616,250 $ 11,068,965 $ 6,260,448 23% 117% CA $ 83,598,726 $ 71,951,648 $ 48,786,070 16% 71% CO $ 6,815,467 $ 6,097,813 $ 4,735,996 12% 44% CT $ 8,554,006 $ 9,810,824 $ 6,787,613 -13% 26% DC $ 2,023,055 $ 2,838,882 $ 1,829,183 -29% 11% DE $ 1,870,439 $ 1,669,426 $ 740,005 12% 153% FL $ 79,664,174 $ 84,491,040 $ 47,796,186 -6% 67% GA $ 13,822,654 $ 12,154,732 $ 6,953,126 14% 99% GU $ 23,475 $ 61,491 $ 9,396 -62% 150% HI $ 3,511,428 $ 4,707,292 $ 3,149,891 -25% 11% IA $ 9,261,662 $ 7,973,218 $ 6,739,156 16% 37% ID $ 1,685,637 $ 1,246,073 $ 842,501 35% 100% IL $ 15,571,396 $ 14,022,683 $ 9,770,834 11% 59% IN $ 9,754,263 $ 9,359,454 $ 5,834,525 4% 67% KS $ 5,619,810 $ 5,187,276 $ 3,519,857 8% 60% KY $ 5,562,791 $ 5,184,777 $ 3,636,333 7% 53% LA $ 20,518,942 $ 17,883,168 $ 11,495,497 15% 78% MA $ 17,035,775 $ 15,255,682 $ 8,980,394 12% 90% MD $ 6,161,138 $ 4,881,020 $ 3,004,956 26% 105% ME $ 1,826,143 $ 1,393,303 $ 1,449,308 31% 26% MI $ 7,287,062 $ 5,784,426 $ 3,112,100 26% 134% MN $ 6,072,364 $ 6,034,414 $ 4,382,496 1% 39% MO $ 10,054,439 $ 8,579,964 $ 5,611,173 17% 79% MP $ 1,406 $ 673 $ - 109% MS $ 5,401,764 $ 4,954,089 $ 3,545,564 9% 52% MT $ 1,107,818 $ 965,222 $ 546,157 15% 103% NC $ 10,477,327 $ 9,385,350 $ 5,916,463 12% 77% ND $ 1,808,961 $ 1,518,138 $ 1,033,168 19% 75% NE $ 3,426,045 $ 2,733,969 $ 1,819,577 25% 88% NH $ 1,579,406 $ 1,773,337 $ 1,516,804 -11% 4% NJ $ 33,570,528 $ 28,862,467 $ 17,035,409 16% 97% NM $ 2,025,523 $ 1,735,136 $ 662,921 17% 206% NV $ 4,598,626 $ 4,574,608 $ 2,440,079 1% 88% NY $ 47,243,273 $ 47,674,483 $ 27,419,308 -1% 72%


State Direct Premium



Written 2016

Percent Change


2018

Percent Change


2018 OH $ 15,400,298 $ 14,202,904 $ 5,628,305 8% 174% OK $ 3,076,462 $ 3,507,498 $ 1,746,619 -12% 76% OR $ 6,248,012 $ 4,730,473 $ 2,910,035 32% 115% PA $ 22,141,354 $ 18,832,760 $ 13,240,946 18% 67% PR $ 21,658,142 $ 19,554,982 $ 19,436,229 11% 11% RI $ 2,317,465 $ 2,623,963 $ 1,286,538 -12% 80% SC $ 13,703,417 $ 12,726,603 $ 10,633,358 8% 29% SD $ 834,247 $ 770,092 $ 572,506 8% 46% TN $ 12,179,549 $ 8,584,856 $ 5,939,417 42% 105% TX $ 63,221,041 $ 53,512,832 $ 31,771,120 18% 99% UT $ 2,712,200 $ 1,958,666 $ 1,050,341 38% 158% VA $ 9,475,832 $ 8,527,381 $ 4,727,129 11% 100% VI $ 37,329 $ 43,449 $ 122,459 -14% -70% VT $ 698,550 $ 520,374 $ 297,124 34% 135% WA $ 12,061,004 $ 11,566,163 $ 9,609,189 4% 26% WI $ 5,896,222 $ 4,140,377 $ 2,300,499 42% 156% WV $ 1,804,872 $ 1,986,325 $ 1,614,061 -9% 12% WY $ 899,933 $ 959,541 $ 713,965 -6% 26% Total $ 643,879,997 $ 589,147,189 $ 376,130,254 9% 71%

As reported on Property & Casualty Annual Statement Blank, State Page, as of April 1, 2019

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

-

100,000,000

200,000,000

300,000,000

400,000,000

500,000,000

600,000,000

700,000,000

2016 2017 2018

Private Flood Insurance Marketfor U.S. States and Territories

Written Premium Earned Premium Number of Writers


Caveats It is important to understand a number of limitations within the Annual Statement data. The reported information is limited to only those insurers required to file a Property and Casualty Annual Statement with the NAIC. Insurers doing business as non-licensed or non-admitted insurers are known as surplus lines insurers. They serve as an alternative marketplace to provide coverage for unique exposures and often serve as a testing ground for product innovations before they are written by the admitted market. Domestic and foreign insurers are required to file the Annual Statement as they are considered an admitted insurer in at least one state. Alien insurers, which are domiciled outside the U.S., can choose to be licensed or admitted in one or more states if they wish. If they do choose to be licensed or admitted, then they too must file the Annual Statement. However, if an alien insurer decides not to become licensed in any state, the District of Columbia or U.S. territory, then no Annual Statement filing is required. The premium writings by alien surplus lines insurers are not included in the information contained in this report. Since we believe there may be a significant amount of premium written by alien surplus lines insurers, the reader should be cognizant of this potentially important missing element. Frequently, early submissions of data are not complete or accurate. This should be considered when reviewing the inaugural 2016 as well as subsequent filings of private flood insurance data. It is possible companies that should have filed private flood insurance data separately on the State Page failed to do so, or did so inaccurately. Based on the history of other data additions to the Annual Statement, we expect the quality of the private flood insurance data to improve in subsequent years. It should be noted the largest provider of flood insurance writes primarily commercial coverage for businesses rather than coverage for personal dwellings. This may be true of others. The data collected does not distinguish between commercial and residential exposures. Recommendations A major caveat contained in this report is the missing information on the amount of premium written by alien surplus lines insurers. Staff believes there are significant premium writings in this segment of the overall market. As the Catastrophe Insurance (C) Working Group continues to look at various state proposals and other suggestions to help guide efforts to develop a consistent approach to enhancing and facilitating growth of the emerging private flood insurance market, it may wish to consider a couple suggestions related to private flood data. First, the Working Group may wish to consider recommending that the Surplus Lines (C) Task Force make submission of private flood insurance data a condition for continuing to be listed on the Quarterly Listing of Alien Insurers. Secondly, the Working Group should explore potential revisions to the Annual Statement that would indicate differences between commercial and residential private flood coverage as well


as instructions clarifying that premiums related to endorsements are desired as well as first-dollar coverage. Conclusion This report summarizes findings within the third submission of private flood insurance data. If information can be obtained from the alien surplus lines insurers, a more complete picture of the 56 U.S. private flood insurance markets will emerge. The quality of the data collected should also improve in subsequent years. It is expected the private flood insurance market will continue to grow, first in the surplus lines market, and then in the admitted market. Having more complete and accurate data will provide regulators with important insight into the private market as it grows.


Attachment Six Hear Presentation from the Global

Alliance for Vehicle Data Access (GAVDA)

4/4/2019

1

Presentation to theProperty and Casualty (C) Committee

National Association of Insurance Commissioners

Orlando, FloridaApril 8, 2019

Gregory M. ScottExecutive Director

1

GAVDA IN THE U.S. – WHO?

2

1

2

4/4/2019

2

GAVDA – WHEN?

• Started in 2017

• Reaction to ACEA’s “Extended Vehicle” Proposal

• Vehicle Data Access Debate in E.U., Canada, U.S. . . . .

• Exploded in 2018

• Expanding Globally in 2019

3

GAVDA – WHY? – PART 1

Fundamental Purpose

Do not permit vehicle and equipment manufacturers to shut down access to vehicle and equipment data. Vehicle owners should

control data access.

Privacy, Competition, Consumer Protection and Safety Are Priorities

4

3

4

4/4/2019

3

GAVDA – WHY? – PART 2

• Privacy– Compliance with Privacy Statutes and Regulations

– What is Personally Identifiable Information?

– What is Vehicle Generated Information?

• Competition ‐‐ If Manufacturers Vertically Integrate, Competition Disappears

• Consumer Protection – If Competition Disappears, Consumer Choice Suffers

• Safety – Without Data Access, Safety Disappears

5

GAVDA – WHAT?

Mission Statement

GAVDA is a diverse group of global stakeholders and thought leaders united by the common goal of

ensuring the right of private and commercial motor vehicle owners to maintain control over their

vehicle‐generated data. This is to be achieved by preserving and enhancing the current vehicle data environment of open, secure, technology‐neutral, and direct access by vehicle owners to real‐time

data.

6

5

6

4/4/2019

4

GAVDA – WHERE?

• Currently Engaged In:

– U.S.

– E.U.

– Canada

– Australia

–Mexico

– India

7

EXAMPLE – U.S. VEHICLE DATA ACCESS COALITION

American Automotive Leasing Association National Motor Freight Traffic AssociationAmerican Bus Association Owner‐Operators Independent Drivers AssociationAmerican Car Rental Association Telematics Industry AssociationAmerican Property Casualty Insurance Association Truck Renting and Leasing AssociationAmerican Trucking AssociationsAuto Care Association eDrivingAutomotive Aftermarket Suppliers Association Geotab, Inc.Automotive Fleet and Leasing Association GPS InsightAutomotive Service Association LKQ CorporationCoalition of Auto Repair Equality LytxCoalition for Smarter Transportation Privacy4CarsConsumer Action Recall Masters, Inc.NAFA Fleet Management Association Safelite Group, Inc.National Association of Mutual Insurance CompaniesNational Consumers League

8

7

8

4/4/2019

5

GAVDA AND P&C INSURANCE –NATURAL ALLIES

• Vehicle Data Access Currently Is Key To Insurers:– Underwriting policies appropriately;

– Investigating accidents and determining liability;

– Researching safety improvements

• Vehicle Data Access In The Future Is Key To Insurers:– Connected and autonomous vehicle insurance and

liability;

– Safety and insurance regulators must have access to vehicle data to improve safety and protect consumers

9

GAVDA AND NAIC

• Vehicle Data Access Regulation Poses No Threat to State Regulation of Insurance

• National Vehicle Data Access Standards Sensible for P&C Industry

• Vehicle Data Access Is A Current Issue, Not A Future One

• GAVDA Hopes To Have NAIC’s Support (And Membership?)

10

9

10

4/4/2019

6

WANT TO WORK WITH GAVDA?

• www.gavda.org

–[email protected]

–202‐297‐5123

• Questions or Comments?

• Thank You for the Opportunity

11

11

materials - property and casualty insurance (c) committee€¦ · to flood insurance being...

Documents